Huawei's Revenue Hits Record $122B in 2019 Despite U.S. Sanctions (techcrunch.com) 130
Huawei reported resilient revenue for 2019 on Tuesday as the embattled Chinese technology group continues to grow despite prolonged American campaign against its business, but cautioned that growth next year could prove more challenging. From a report: Eric Xu, Huawei's rotating chairman, wrote in a New Year's message to employees that the company's revenue has topped 850 billion Chinese yuan ($122 billion) this year, a new record high for the Chinese group and an 18% increase over the previous year. Xu said Huawei, the second largest smartphone maker globally, sold 240 million handsets this year, up from 206 million last year. "These figures are lower than our initial projections, yet business remains solid and we stand strong in the face of adversity," he wrote. He acknowledged that Huawei is confronting a "strategic and long-term" campaign against its business by the U.S. government. If the campaign persists for long, it would create even more "difficult" environment for the 32-year-old firm to "survive and thrive," he said.
Despite? or Because Of? (Score:5, Insightful)
The sanctions pretty much say "unlike Cisco, these don't have NSA Spyware".
This might be the best advertising ever for countries more worried about NSA Spying instead of China's.
Remember, it wasn't China who wiretapped the German Chancellery.
https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, and known as the "Streisand Effect" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Remember, it wasn't China who wiretapped the German Chancellery.
No, but you'd be lying to yourself if you thought China wouldn't have loved to have been the tappers of that sweet sweet wire.
Re: (Score:2)
At the moment Huawei are very, very eager to gain market share for their Harmony OS. They are also going Linux https://www.forbes.com/sites/j... [forbes.com] this distro https://www.deepin.org/en/ [deepin.org].
There are certainly going to be some OS motions in 2020, it will certainly be an interesting year all round, lots of stuff going on.
Re: Despite? or Because Of? (Score:2)
They also say, "Look how exposed you are to the whims of the US president and how easily he can exert strong influence on the range of products you have to choose from...best way to avoid that is to avoid products from the USA"
Re: Despite? or Because Of? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
That is a principle which applies to people not governments. Governments have the power to hide their actions and are best assumed guilty and denied the power to commit abuses under the assumption that even if not guilty sooner or later they will be guilty.
Re: (Score:1)
Remember, it wasn't China who wiretapped the German Chancellery.
How are you so sure Chinese didn't spy them as well?
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, it was Obama. He also bombed a Doctors Without Borders hospital and sent gunners in to kill the fleeing nurses and patients.
There is little reason to believe that Obama personally knew about, much less decided, the bugging of Fr. Merkel.
The bombing of the hospital was almost certainly a case of monumental incompetence. It was a humiliating event for America's military, so why would they have done it intentionally?
I served in the military, and I have seen many many cockups, although mostly in training. They are a daily occurrence. The military is very good at sending orders top-down, but very bad at sending feedback from botto
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Who gives a flying fuck whether he knew or not. If he is the "Commander in Chief" of a Military Organization then either (a) he had knowledge, directed, and is responsible for the actions of the troops under his command or (b) he had no knowledge nor control of the troops under his command and is therefore incompetent and unfit for command.
(a) is a criminal offense and (b) is a court martialible offense.
Choose.
Re: (Score:1)
(a) is a criminal offense and (b) is a court martialible offense.
Oh, but Obama can just pardon himself. The US Army these days is officially a terrorist organization, as there's no prosecution for war crimes (see: Trump).
Re: (Score:2)
If he didn't already he is shit out of luck because he isn't President anymore. But as it happens the President is one of a handful of civilians in the military chain of command. He isn't subject to court martial or to military law. Even if he were as the top of the chain of command there wouldn't be a practical way to accomplish it.. You aren't directly accountable to your inferiors in the military, only to superiors who take issue with your actions toward your inferiors. That distinction may be subtle but
Re: (Score:3)
Who gives a flying fuck whether he knew or not. If he is the "Commander in Chief" of a Military Organization then either (a) he had knowledge, directed, and is responsible for the actions of the troops under his command or (b) he had no knowledge nor control of the troops under his command and is therefore incompetent and unfit for command.
(a) is a criminal offense and (b) is a court martialible offense.
Choose.
You know what you're saying isn't true or you would at least have reported it to the proper authorities. The sort of posing you're engaging in is just tedious.
Re: Despite? or Because Of? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh please. There are 4 million federal employees. Claiming that the president is personally legally responsible for what every one of them does every day, is idiotic.
Re: (Score:1)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_responsibility
Nope. We hanged Yamashita for the same offense as Obama. The United States of America confirmed and incorporated the mentioned 1899 and 1907 Hague Conventions on "command responsibility" into United States federal law through the precedent set by the United States Supreme Court (called the "Yamashita standard") in the case of Japanese General Tomoyuki Yamashita. He was prosecuted in 1945 for atrocities committed by troops under his command in the Philipp
Re: (Score:2)
"If he is the "Commander in Chief" of a Military Organization"
Despite having the highest rank in the chain of command the President himself is not considered to be a part of the military itself. He isn't bound by the UCMJ or subject to court martial. There also wouldn't be anyone to sit his court martial. Aside from that suggesting the President not knowing about the actions of a handful of the millions of troops out there before they took them as a criminal offense is preposterous. That's like saying the C
Re: (Score:2)
"There is little reason to believe that Obama personally knew about, much less decided, the bugging of Fr. Merkel."
There might be great reason but we wouldn't know about it either way. There is no particular reason to think POTUS wouldn't have been in the loop on bugging a major head of state. If he wasn't aware he wasn't doing a very good job of being in charge.
He definitely was in the loop and the primary driver behind the massive expansion of NSA/CIA domestic and foreign spying during his Presidency. Whe
Re: (Score:2)
Once upon a time, a President (Truman, for those who didn't know) had a sign made for his desk, with the words "The buck stops here".
Whether Obama knew or not, he was responsible, being Commander in Chief and all that....
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Despite? or Because Of? (Score:1)
Re: Despite? or Because Of? (Score:1)
Obama, bush, trump, whatever. In our eyes theyâ(TM)re USA, and it was USA.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I don't think you understand the press release.
They aren't whining about record setting revenue that's 18% higher than last year. They're bragging and not-so-subtly pointing out that the USA's efforts to screw with their business have utterly failed.
Re: They got caught dirty... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Just days ago there was an article showing how much China pumped into the company. So sure, record earnings when the state is assisting...
Because no Western companies are propped up by excessive venture capital funding for years while bleeding money.
Re: They got caught dirty... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you understand that this is North Korea style propaganda.
Great China Company Better Than Everyone! (prease not to look at the massive government subsidizing)
Re: (Score:2)
''If the campaign persists for long, it would create even more "difficult" environment for the 32-year-old firm to "survive and thrive," he said.''
KInda sounds like whining to me, hence my comment. And the effort has been 100 percent successful in preventing hardware entering our market without any accountability or disclosure of the lineage or origin of the product or components that create the product.
Re: (Score:1)
the effort has been 100 percent successful in preventing hardware entering our market
Yeah and it's also been successful in preventing US 5G rollouts. Sick burn.
Re: (Score:2)
The new frequencies don't penetrate window glass, and the old frequencies we already have.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: They got caught dirty... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The 20 billion IoT devices that are expected to be functioning by this time next year. The 4G network isn't prepared for that kind of load.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: They got caught dirty... (Score:2)
Not much of a benefit to the US customer. We don't have too many towers overloaded like other nations. Our issue is the back haul. LTE required a backhaul upgrade that is still ongoing. The only carrier with an easy upgrade path on the backhaul is ATT with unlit fiber. Verizon has more devices per tower but that means they need even bigger pipes for each tower. This is expensive.
And the current LTE more than suffices for the needs. Our plan costs haven't even adjusted for even half the LTE usage.
I am not
Re: (Score:2)
5G has been rolled out quite heavily in the US... not that it doesn't any good. The way our greedy carriers are rolling it out consumers won't see real benefit but rather just a new logo, the benefit is entirely for the carriers who are pocketing the reduced costs AND charging consumers more for 5G gear.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It depends. A major event is needed to force those 30 and under to grow up. In the past life was hard enough to force people to grow up on its own but that isn't true anymore. The people who keep everything from falling apart, the ones they'd have to look to for what being grown up looks like and how to do it right are indeed getting quite old and dying... in fact most are dead or have dementia, hell most of their kids are dead or have dementia at this point.
There are still some younger grown ups hiding out
Re: They got caught dirty... (Score:1)
Re:They got caught dirty... (Score:4, Insightful)
Nope. They were not caught. If they had been caught, there would be evidence. There is none. And it is pretty clear that the NSA and others will have been looking _very_ carefully for such evidence. But they obviously did not find anything. Hence, the utterly dishonorable approach of simply making empty claims was decided on instead. Worked for those WMD Saddam did not actually have, so can work here again.
As a side-effect, everybody with some actual insight can now be pretty sure that Huawei equipment is clean. Contrary to that, Cisco, for example, is known to be back-doored.
Re: (Score:2)
If they had been caught, there would be evidence.
I submit that there [still] would be no evidence for the argument would be that its revealing would out sources and methods !
Re: (Score:1)
Don't attribute the current U.S. Administration's effort to screw Huawei as something cooked up by the rest of the government. It was cooked up by Administration hacks because our fake president thought it would give him leverage in his dumb trade war.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't attribute the current U.S. Administration's effort to screw Huawei as something cooked up by the rest of the government. It was cooked up by Administration hacks because our fake president thought it would give him leverage in his dumb trade war.
Meh, there's a reason communications is the first amendment and guns the second. I doubt the Trump administration had any trouble finding people concerned about key communications gear - even though it's civilian - delivered by the Chinese. It's the kind of infrastructure you want working not only in a trade war but a cold war or hot war, never mind the potential for espionage. That they generally reject free speech and privacy is all the more reason to not let them control any part of the information flow.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't attribute the level of concern we should have over the malicious actions of Huawei and China as something related to how we feel about the current administration. Despite what Chinese sock puppets spread there has been more than enough evidence against them including the strongest of all for this kind of difficult to prove thing. They could do it, they have huge motive to do it, there is no downside for them, and it is completely in character and in accord with their principles in China.
The Chinese ha
Re: (Score:2)
there is no downside for them,
Wrong. Look, I have no love for the Chinese government, but why are you accuse them based on made-up lies? That just devalues your argument and makes you suspect as well.
The pretty clear downside is that if they get caught, more that the usual spineless US vassals would stop buying their stuff. That requires evidence though. But the reality of things is that it is not that hard to do the respective analysis. Sure, may take a few months and may cost a few 100k, and needs people that know their stuff (which a
Re: They got caught dirty... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh? And so how do you explain the absence of any evidence? Do you really think the NSA is incapable of finding such backdoors (if they were present)? I happen to know some NSA contractors and I assure you, if there were backdoors, these people would have found them. And do you really think the current US administration would not have used solid evidence if it was available?
No common sense? Yes, you qualify. Unless you have some really good answers to the above.
Re: (Score:2)
There is evidence, there has been more than enough evidence revealed that you and those like you continue to ignore or rationalize away. No I'm not listing it all out and having that debate, that debate has been had too many times already.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no evidence. I follow the relevant security lists and publications. No evidence of backdoors in Huawei equipment was presented anywhere. No independent validation has taken place, but since there is no evidence, that is already redundant.
There have been a lot of _accusations_, but that is not evidence.
You are obviously operating under "what I tell you three times is truth", like many liars do. Some of us, me among them, require a bit more to be convinced, like, say, some actual facts.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes me too.
Then you know that despite denials they made their way into the servers of the big players in the US the Super Micro spy chips were still real. You know there is plenty of evidence of chinese hacking and back doors foscam and other generic webcams shipped to the United States. You know that vendors like FireEye are fighting constantly against malware being spread by Chinese state sponsored hacking groups. There is certainly no shortage of evidence that Huawei is merely an agent of the Chinese sta
Re: (Score:2)
regardless of the evidence, that's not why the Trump Administration went after them. Several months ago Trump even admitted that Huawei would be allowed back in if China signed the trade deal he wanted.
Never attribute to the Trump Administration a thought out policy. That administration is merely an extension of Trump's ego and serves no purpose but him. That's why he's a fake president.
Re: They got caught dirty... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He's your President if you're an American.
As was Obama, and many conservatives regularly denied that he was their president. I used to admin a large pro-gun forum and I regularly had to point out to Obama haters that he was their president, no matter how much they disliked or disagreed with him.
To be fair, I think it was the left that started the "Not my president" meme in a big way, during the Bush (Jr.) era. But the right jumped on board with both feet during Obama's presidency. And given that Trump is what he is, and his narrow margin of vi
Re: (Score:2)
All true but you do have to admit. If Obama were engaged in a trade war or any other war with China the culture of the right lends itself more to respecting the office itself for such an event.
It doesn't matter how much you like or dislike Trump or we wish he wasn't there, if he loses we all lose and there is a more than fair chance it will be the people too busy hating Trump to rally solid support for the position of the United States who will be most directly responsible.
It's like that stupid wall. Was it
Re: (Score:2)
"regardless of the evidence, that's not why the Trump Administration went after them"
Well you won't hear any argument from me on that point. Trump is all about trade and a threat to our economy. Which if you are an American you should decry on a moral basis but not with too much conviction since either we get poorer or they get poorer and there is no particular reason you have to oppose your own self-interest in favor of that of the Chinese government.
Personally, I think we should look historically on the R
Re: (Score:2)
Re: They got caught dirty... (Score:2)
Why are you marked insightful? There are 10 actual indictments against Huawei. And these were done after Huawei was warned multiple times that they were violating sanctions and not curbing corruption. They were given ample opportunities to come into compliance with prior judgements and they basically played lip service to all of them or assumed they were too big/important for the JD to charge & sanction them. It is REALLY hard for a private enterprise to get this level of sanctioning and have it sta
Re: (Score:3)
The claim was "were caught red handed and dirty embedding firm or malware in their products". (Not that this sentence makes much sense, as firmware is just an embedded OS and putting it in is pretty much required for things to work at all. I was referring to the "malware".) There is Zero evidence for that, the indictments are for other things.
Hence what people like you do is just parroting propaganda lies, which, incidentally, makes you a liar as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Fuckwit, I read at -2, so I can see comments that fucktards like you mod down simply because you don't agree with the author.
Re: (Score:2)
er, no. The USA government and the corporations that have it in its pockets gets caught time and again being dirty,
not seeing any evidence Huawei did anything wrong.
Quit bleating so loud, sheep.
Re: (Score:2)
Hypocrisy might be emotionally satisfying but isn't a valid logical argument. The actions of China being wrong is independent of any alleged wrongs someone else has committed.
We could debate the evidence you've chosen to disregard but honestly the biggest factor for me in critical analysis of the situation is this. Nothing China is accused of is even unethical within their value system, they have everything to gain and nothing to lose. They have no concept of arms length between government interests and eco
Freedom to compete in China? (Score:2)
Probably deserves an insightful mod, but I never get a mod point to give you [Shaitan]. That's because yours is one of the two visible mentions of "free" in the entire discussion.
However, I actually think your statement is too far off the wall. I think that the Chinese people certainly have some notion of freedom and choice. Yes, there are limits, but they are not so different from ours.
For example, I'm sure Huawei would like customers to be free to choose any product as long as Huawei sells it, but Amazon
Re: Freedom to compete in China? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Inaccurate and not responsive to anything that I actually wrote, but if you're going to base your position on alternative facts then it seems we have nothing to discuss here.
Re: (Score:2)
Not true, you conflated Trump to Xi and he pointed out the difference. The organ donor program point might be slightly hyperbolic but there are certainly mass camps of people Xi doesn't like receiving that treatment. More than enough of the crimes and human rights violations leaks out of China and is confirmed to at least a preponderance of evidence to not give them the benefit of the doubt. It's a fair bet that things are actually worse than we'd imagine, certainly are worse than we know, and not even a sl
Re: (Score:2)
Only new comment is your implicit claim to have spoken to actual Chinese people. I do not believe you, and especially I do not believe that you have spoken to any significant number of them (if you have spoken to any of them). It is possible you have spoken to one or two, but I am sure that it was under circumstances that did not allow them to speak "freely" without appealing to or even pandering to your obvious prejudices.
You heard what you wanted to hear and continued to believe what you want to believe.
Re: (Score:2)
"he would gladly jail his adversaries and critics if he had as much power as Xi does."
Yes, but that is why Trump is a temp. His purpose is to undermine congress and all the unelected powers throughout the executive branch who aren't temps, their purpose is to undermine each other, the courts are supposed to be undermining both and we are supposed to be undermining all three when we vote, represent our communities by exercising jury nullification, and when enough of us remain armed and trained in the use of
Re: (Score:2)
From your run-on mumbling I cannot determine if you are sincerely ignorant, brainwashed, or worse. Let's pretend there is some possibility of discussion here regarding the ACTUAL topic. I can only see one point of highly fractured agreement, though it is off topic. Yes, Trump is clearly too incompetent to last, but the destruction of our Constitutional system could be permanent. Total entropy always increases.
Back to the actual topic. Can you conceive that there might be other ways to twiddle an economic sy
Re: (Score:2)
> They [and ZTE and others] were caught red handed and dirty embedding firm or malware in their products.
Unlike, say, Cisco?
https://www.theregister.co.uk/... [theregister.co.uk]
Backdoors are commonplace for high end network equipment. As best I can tell, it's mandated for all backbone routers both foreigh and domestic.
Re: They got caught dirty... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I was suggesting that it's typical for high end hardware vendors to embed back doors, as mandated by their nation's security agencies. We should not be _surprised_ by it.
Finally recommendations were implemented. (Score:3, Informative)
Huawei has had a long, long time to correct what experts say the problem is. They just didn't think we had sufficient government to enforce the recommendations. They were given sufficient time and notification as to what would be necessary to play in this sandbox. To this day they haven't complied. They get what they deserve.
Published Oct, 2012
https://stacks.stanford.edu/fi... [stanford.edu]
Here's what the experts say today.
https://www.theverge.com/2019/... [theverge.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
There is no way to prove a future update couldn't introduce a backdoor. But that is true of any company from any country.
America knows this as it has done it itself. It's a complete farce top to bottom.
Re: (Score:3)
Huawei has had a long, long time to correct what experts say the problem is. They just didn't think we had sufficient government to enforce the recommendations. They were given sufficient time and notification as to what would be necessary to play in this sandbox. To this day they haven't complied. They get what they deserve.
Published Oct, 2012 https://stacks.stanford.edu/fi... [stanford.edu]
Here's what the experts say today. https://www.theverge.com/2019/... [theverge.com]
A professor of marketing and innovation, two law professors and two US senators? ... the only people whose opinion is worth something are the two people with a Comp Sci. background and they are not only merely speculating about how Huawei systems could be a threat, everything they point out could equally apply to US manufacturers dropping the same vulnerabilities into US made telco equipment on behalf of the NSA/CIA etc. From my point of view that is merely a choice of whether I want to be spied on and have
Re: (Score:2)
Come to order class (Score:2)
$222B without the sanctions (Score:1)
Prove me wrong. First you have to prove that $122B is not made up. Maybe they are using Enron accounting methods, who knows.
They are a Chinese company in bed with the Chinese government. Economic numbers coming from China must make the state look good or you get arrested [theguardian.com]..
Re: (Score:1)
as if... (Score:1)
Credit where it's due (Score:1)
I'm using a Huawei mate 20 (regular, curved screens can die)
I believe it has a 7nm processor, it's very fast, it's got ridiculous battery length and I replace my base launcher with Nova on all my phone's anyhow.
The feature set is insane
Wifi hot spot, with data limit (4g)
Wifi hot spot repeater (share another wifi signal)
Super fast charging
Samsung duo / emui desktop thing over USB C, wth keyboard monitor support etc
Reverse charging (use it as a power bank)
Extremely wide angle photos
NOT A DAMN CURVED SCREEN, B
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like you never thought of putting your phone under your hat.
What hat? Wearing a hat while running sounds even more annoying than corded headphones. I used to run with annoying corded headphones, but have never run while wearing a hat (and generally wouldn't wear a hat while not running either, though I will wear a hooded jacket in cold weather.)
I've run literally several thousand miles while wearing Bluetooth headphones and they are vastly better than wired headphones. However, I will mention that it took me a while to find the correct Bluetooth headphones. I went t
Re: (Score:2)
Offtopic eh? Someone is very jaded / angry I don't like Samsung anymore?
Very on topic.
And yet... (Score:1)
I'll never buy one. Good for China that people there take pride in local products and buy local. Then there are the countries that do business with China and take loans from them. Good luck with that you guys! All the best!
Revenue by segment? (Score:2)
USA != The World (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Real news please, Mrs. Mash! (Score:1)